It's the offense and the lack of a superstar RH profile in the middle of the lineup.Posted by hankwilliamsjr

So which young superstar RH slugger should the Sox have gotten / get and what would you give up for them? No weasel words like "blocked prospects", name names. Funny that you never actually give details, isn't it honey?

softlaw I disagree. If you need to win by scoring 6+ runs a game than you are in big trouble. It is why we lost last year. IMOPosted by BurritoT

When scoring 4 runs or less; 2-12, when scoring 6 or more; 10-2, they have yet to score just 5 runs in any game. So it's been all or nothing, just like last year. The two camps (hitting or pitching) are both right to certain degrees. The pitching camp recognizes that you are lucky to get any decent production from 4-5 starters, so their emphasis when talking about pitching should be the quality of 1-3. The hitting camp sees all the games just out of reach due to minimal run production. The Rays are creating a new paradigm, the question is how? The answer is Maddon.

After a brief glimpse of Lavarnway last September--he is a RH bat that might help the lineup. Ciriaco might be a good shot in the arm type that has speed and can play multiple positions and hit. I would move DMac, Salty or Shop and Punto and replace with Lav and Ciriaco. Look on the open market and bring in Vlad as a PH, occasional DH and an occasional LF, at least a threat off the bench. I would also bring up Iggy and make him SS, moving Aviles to LF. Play Sweeney everyday and see what he can do againt lefties.

If the pitching can keep you in most games holding the opp. to 4 to 6 runs then you should have a 50-50 chance to win. I think our pitching will settle in and do an okay job.

Aviles, Salty, Shop, DMac, Sweeney, Punto and Ross are settling in and will be producing as they have historically. That's not unusual. The difference is on most teams these players are role players and aren't counted on to produce big numbers.

The same can be said for Pedroia, AGon, Papi--Papi will hit between .280 and .300 not .380; they will produce and get their HR's and RBI. With good tough teams with good advance scouting these guys are going to be pitched around and it will force guys like Ross, Aviles and Sweeney to do more than they are capapable of.

Without the threat of having CC, Youk and Ells in the lineup we are, at best, about a .500 to .650 winning % age team.

This short trip to KC will be an eye opener to Sox fans---they have speed, decent piching, they can hit, they are fundamentally pretty sound and they are pretty young.

The O's keep coming at you--they may sweep the Sox this weekend--I'm in hopes has a good outing today.

The Sox HAVE TO MAKE MORE CHANGES---BEN YOU'VE STARTED YOU HAVE TO KEEP MOVING FORWARD; NOT EASY CHANGES BUT CRITICAL CHANGES.

Infied--AGon, Pedroia, Iggy and Middlebrooks.

Outfield---Aviles, Ross and Sweeney

Catcher--Lavarnway

DH--Ortiz

Subs--Ciriaco, Salty, Byrd, Vlad or (Gomez from the PawSox)

Pitching---Lester, Beck, Cook, Douby and Bard(Buch DL-Blister)

Pen--Aceves, Morales, Albers, Hill, Atch, Padilla, Mortenson.

Come on Ben--You will also have to part with a Starting Pitcher--One of the Big Three and it should be the one that can bring you the most in return-Lester/Beckett.

The offense is hitting .271 (fourth in MLB) and and averaging 5.4 runs a game (fourth in MLB). However, both figures are misleading, boosted by seven games in which the Sox scored 10 or more runs. They've scored three or fewer 12 times. In short, while the offensive numbers look good, anyone who watches the team knows the offense has been extremely inconsistent.

But make no mistake, it's also the pitching. The team ERA is 5.38, which is next to last (better than only the Twins) in MLB. All five starters in the rotation are worse than 4.45. In 25 games, only eight times has a starter gone seven innings.

You can win 3-2 , 1-0 or 10-9. Just win. They are not doing that. They are falling into a losing pattern , dating back to last September. You can argue offense vs. pitching all day. The fact is , this team is lacking in many areas. The fact that we are first in scoring is deceiving. They can pile up the runs in a handful of games , then fail miserably in others. Bottom line: Look at the standings. We are buried in the cellar. The worst part is , that does not come as a surprise.

The first place Tampa Bay Rays last five games they've scored, 7, 4, 5, 3, and 3 runs in the respective games. They've won all of them. It's the pitching, this Red Sox team is having difficulty winning games where they score 4 or less runs.

We're first in runs scored. We're last in runs allowed. So the problem according to the guy that thinks Ellsbury belongs on the bench behind Cameron thinks the problem is that we should trade pitching for more offense. Just out of curiosity, since we're already 1st in scoring, how much more scoring do we need?Posted by Joebreidey

Joe we don't need more scoring we need more consistent scoring. We score 10 runs one game and struggle to score 1 or 2 the next game.

our hitting is a lot of smoke and mirrors...we stated this last yr but so many on this board kept on saying we were in the top 5 or whatever...its feast or famine with our bats...i mentioned this a few days ago that our big guns are simply nowhere as big as we need them to be...Pedroia batting cleanup? He has 9 rbis or so? Agon 2 homers??? Youk in convalescence? Oh yea, our pitching top 3 stink...

Surely one of the dumber threads recently, but one in which hankwilliamsjr and georom make perfect bedfellows.

While it is absolutely true that teams win with good hitting and good pitching win games and also true that the Sox have for a decade or more enjoyed good hitting and good success, there can be little doubt that the current franchise malaise, going now on its fourth straight year of not getting to the playoffs, is the result of bad pitching.

While the Sox were competitive in 2009, 2010, and 2011, largely because of good hitting and scoring, they failed to get to the playoffs because the pitching was below average in the AL.

Now when the Sox have the 2d worst--and possibly after today the worst, where it is has been for most of the early season--ERA in the American League, a bunch of ignorant Sox fans are blaming the hitting for the Sox problems.

The Baltimore Orioles, meanwhile, may be excused for thinking that by and large they can beat the Sox at Fenway because they have not just better pitching, but much better pitching than the Sox. That's how they won last night's game despite three errors, and that's why the Sox are going to lose again today.

Joe we don't need more scoring we need more consistent scoring. We score 10 runs one game and struggle to score 1 or 2 the next game.

Runs scored per game:

Bos TB NYY Bal Tor

0-3 12 11 9 12 8

4- 7 5 11 14 11 15

8+ 8 4 3 3 4

Wins 11 19 14 17 16

It seems to me that there isn't much difference in 0-3 runs scored between Boston and the first and second place teams. The only tangible difference is instead of scoring 4-7 runs 11 times and 8+ runs 3-4 times, the Sox scored 8+ runs 4-5 times more.

Now, look at runs allowed and see if there is a stronger co-relation:

Runs allowed per game:

Bos TB NYY Bal Tor

0-3 9 14 9 14 13

4-7 12 11 15 10 11

8+ 4 2 2 2 3

Wins 11 19 14 17 16

Well, lookie here! The teams withthe most 0-3 runs allowed games have the most wins (TB and Bal), in fact, the standings are in direct co-relation to the runs allowed totals.

1) TB - Tied for 1st in 0-3 runs allowed and ahead of Bal in games with 4-7 runs allowed.

2) Bal - Tied for first in games with 0-3 runs allowed.

3) Tor - Very close to Baltimore in 0-3 runs and 4-7 runs allowed. (1.5 games behind the O's).

4) NYY - Same amount of 0-3 runs allowed games as Boston, but 3 more 4-7 allowed and 2 less 7+ runs allowed games (2.5 games ahead of the Sox).

5) Boston- Last in 8+ runs allowed games (4) . Last in 6+ runs allowed games (10). Last in AL East.

Small sample size? Yes!

So, let's look at 2011 totals:

Runs scored:

Bos TB NY Bal Tor

0-3 55 70 49 64 70

4-7 67 65 80 80 68

8+ 40 27 33 18 24

Runs allowed:

0-3 67 82 83 51 63

4-7 68 65 63 72 78

8+ 27 15 16 39 21

Wins 90 91 97 69 81

Yes, the Yanks had the fewest games with 0-3 runs scored, but they also had the fewest games with 4+ or 8+ runs allowed. Now, compare the Rays and Sox: what's the biggest variable? TB scored 0-3 runs 15 more times than the Sox, but still won 1 more game. If it was mostly about consistent scoring, TB should have finished last place. The biggest differential was in runs allowed. TB had 16 more games with 0-3 runs allowed than the Sox and 11 less games with 8+ runs allowed.

Some say that TB had more "timely" or "better clutch" hitting than the Sox...

2011 OPS:

Late & Close High Leverage

Boston .750 .771

TB Rays .687 .748

NOT!

It's almost always about the pitching (and defense).

Keeping the score lower puts you in more games with a chance to win.

A team with 750 runs scored and 650 runs allowed will almost always win more than an 850-750 or 900-800 team. It's not that complicated to figure out why.